To what extent is that truism exemplified in the shared perspectives (on states rights and federal power) of the marijuana entrepreneur in Oakland and gun-rights activist in Montana?

The shared perspectives of the marijuana entrepreneur in Oakland and gun-rights activist in Montana on states rights and federal power could vary widely depending on the specifics of their respective positions.

The marijuana entrepreneur in Oakland likely views states rights as a means to protect their business’s ability to remain in operation, as marijuana is still illegal on the federal level. This entrepreneur may be in favor of states having the right to make their own laws regarding marijuana, as it would help their business remain viable. Meanwhile, the gun-rights activist in Montana may view states rights as a way to protect their Second Amendment rights from federal encroachment. This perspective would likely be rooted in a desire to keep the federal government from passing laws that could impede the ability of individuals to own and use firearms.

In terms of federal power, the marijuana entrepreneur in Oakland may be wary of too much federal power, as it could lead to new laws that might make their business illegal. On the other hand, the gun-rights activist in Montana may support an increased role of the federal government in protecting their Second Amendment rights, as they could view it as a means of ensuring that their rights are not infringed upon.

Overall, the shared perspectives of the marijuana entrepreneur in Oakland and gun-rights activist in Montana on states rights and federal power could vary greatly depending on their respective positions and the specifics of the issue at hand.